3: The land gets sold to highest bidder, which is back to JC business usual, where nothing but money talks. The land is built out to the maximum possible revenue generating structures with no regard to benefiting the community.

Is there a "4"?

There's gotta be a mix. Don't get me wrong, I like Plan #1, but the only way it's getting funded if there is an infusion of private investment if a small portion of the site is sold at market value to private interest for a condo/apartment/office/hotel/etc...

Please prove me wrong, but there is no way this nearly $300,000,000 project moves forward without tapping into the awesome values in the real estate market. Please prove me wrong.

Yes, bodhipooh, you do attack on a personal level. It is something I don't do because it is wrong. But returning to the subject. The land belongs to the citizens of Jersey City and the citizens are facing a revaluation where one third of its homeowners will see a tax increase. A short distance from this 16 acres was a sale of 71/2 acres for $35 million that was reported in the newspaper. Something is wrong that the city refuses to have this land assessed before its transferred. Have the land assessed.

Yvonne wrote:Councilman Boggiano said the director of Liberty Science Center makes over $400,000 a year in a salary, more than the salary of the president. If they can afford to pay him a salary like that they the center can afford to pay for land. This is the last large open space in JC and reval is around the corner. The city should sell and place in the budget to soften the blow for the reval.

We all know facts dont matter to you, but... if you are referring to the US President, the salary for the position is 400K, plus many other perks (including a travel account, entertainment account, around the clock security, etc) and it should be noted that many, many positions (particularly those like directors of non-profits, museums, universities, etc) are seemingly paid obscene amounts not because they are complex jobs, but because these people have a proven track record of fundraising.

Many years ago, I read a very insightful article into the practice. For those looking from the outside, it seems like crazy money, but a well known, effective fundraiser that can bring in millions and millions of dollars year after year on fundraising, gifts, pledges, etc. is a better investment for an organization looking to hire a CEO or director, than a relatively unknown person unable to generate that kind of investments and gifts. So, what does it matter if the head of a well known museum is paid 5 million dollars, if he can bring in 100 million in fundraising? Would you rather have a net ~90MM operating income generated by that single person? Or, have 10 or 20 MM ??

You may be right on that, but... there are at least seven other officers & employees of LSC that make well over $100,000 a year plus other perks and benefits, with few if any of them living in Jersey City. Additionally, when Liberty Science Center laid off all of those people back in 2008 when the economy was in bad shape, guess how many of those six-figure officers were laid off? Zero. Did any of them agree to take a salary cut in light of the times? You know the answer. Somehow this place has the money to pay the $ 100,000/200,000/400,000+ salaries, but has to cut people with $ 30,000+ salaries.

Furthermore, of the five highest independent contractors paid by LSC according to their 2015 tax return, guess how many of those contractors were businesses based in Jersey City? You know the answer.

This place has gotten somewhat better but still sorely lacks the fiscal discipline and commitment to Jersey City needed to build their case for this land.

caj11, I dont dispute the facts you state. And, I definitely I am not an LSC defender. It could very well be that the place is a mismanagement cesspool. I dont know enough about their operations to even begin to form an opinion on that matter. I was just pointing out that highly paid directors are not an uncommon thing, and that organizations often hire well-connected people because they are simply "buying" access to that person's contacts in the form of fundraising drives, etc.

I have been to LSC three times with my daughter. My personal, honest take is somewhere here in JCLIST. I will give you the short version: not impressed, AT ALL. During each visit, it felt like a bunch of the displays were broken. The place, despite its size, feels underwhelming in content and exhibits. Overall, it really was a very disappointing experience each time. I also went to see a blockbuster movie in their dome IMAX screen. That was OK, but nothing great, and the dome form factor was not great for the movie I was watching (Star Trek) so I never went back to see other such movies.

Yvonne wrote:bodhipooh, you think that attacking someone on a personal level will get you a win, but it shows this administration is running scare and are afraid of facts. They are afraid to do a assessment on the property before it is transferred. Boggiano also made a comment in the value of land at Exchange Place. He said an acre of land is worth $84 million, there. You can find his comments on the city's website or youtube when the council voted for the first reading. Why is the city afraid of doing an assessment before the transfer?

Are you claiming that I have attacked you on a personal level? Because I stated that facts aren't of any importance to you?? That's simply stating the truth. EVERYBODY in JCLIST believes that. You should ask yourself why that is.

And, are you seriously equating land in Exchange Place with contaminated swamp land in the middle of nowhere?? Next thing, you will probably assert that this land is the same as the WTC land, since they are both in the same geographical area and have the same total land area, but we all know that is not true.

Yvonne wrote:Councilman Boggiano said the director of Liberty Science Center makes over $400,000 a year in a salary, more than the salary of the president. If they can afford to pay him a salary like that they the center can afford to pay for land. This is the last large open space in JC and reval is around the corner. The city should sell and place in the budget to soften the blow for the reval.

We all know facts dont matter to you, but... if you are referring to the US President, the salary for the position is 400K, plus many other perks (including a travel account, entertainment account, around the clock security, etc) and it should be noted that many, many positions (particularly those like directors of non-profits, museums, universities, etc) are seemingly paid obscene amounts not because they are complex jobs, but because these people have a proven track record of fundraising.

Many years ago, I read a very insightful article into the practice. For those looking from the outside, it seems like crazy money, but a well known, effective fundraiser that can bring in millions and millions of dollars year after year on fundraising, gifts, pledges, etc. is a better investment for an organization looking to hire a CEO or director, than a relatively unknown person unable to generate that kind of investments and gifts. So, what does it matter if the head of a well known museum is paid 5 million dollars, if he can bring in 100 million in fundraising? Would you rather have a net ~90MM operating income generated by that single person? Or, have 10 or 20 MM ??

You may be right on that, but... there are at least seven other officers & employees of LSC that make well over $100,000 a year plus other perks and benefits, with few if any of them living in Jersey City. Additionally, when Liberty Science Center laid off all of those people back in 2008 when the economy was in bad shape, guess how many of those six-figure officers were laid off? Zero. Did any of them agree to take a salary cut in light of the times? You know the answer. Somehow this place has the money to pay the $ 100,000/200,000/400,000+ salaries, but has to cut people with $ 30,000+ salaries.

Furthermore, of the five highest independent contractors paid by LSC according to their 2015 tax return, guess how many of those contractors were businesses based in Jersey City? You know the answer.

This place has gotten somewhat better but still sorely lacks the fiscal discipline and commitment to Jersey City needed to build their case for this land.

bodhipooh, you think that attacking someone on a personal level will get you a win, but it shows this administration is running scare and are afraid of facts. They are afraid to do a assessment on the property before it is transferred. Boggiano also made a comment in the value of land at Exchange Place. He said an acre of land is worth $84 million, there. You can find his comments on the city's website or youtube when the council voted for the first reading. Why is the city afraid of doing an assessment before the transfer?

Some very succinct points here and the process seems like a total land grab for some political cronies.

Quote:

paig55 wrote:I have so many concerns about this transaction. Many concerns that every property taxpayer and voter in JC should have FULL answers to before this transfer is approved.

Why wouldn't the council have the real estate appraised before the closing? Who ever heard of closing on real estate before having it appraised. As a homeowner didn't you have the property you were purchasing appraised before you purchased it?

Why is the Council President Lavarro voting on this transfer when he is also the Chair of JCRA. There must be a conflict of interest here. It may not be unlawful, but is certainly is unethical. As NJRA chair he has information about this transaction that no one else on the council has, yet he is allowed to vote on this transaction. Lavarro should abstain from voting, that is the ethical thing to do.Also Daniel Rivera who also sits on the JCRA board. This the only ethical thing to do.

Why is the council and mayor promoting this 50/50 and 80/20 revenue share? They forgot to tell the public THERE WILL BE NO REVENUE SHARE. You ask why, this is why. Because the full agreement reads, that revenue will be shared when it exceeds expenses. Also, the revenue share will NOT include any revenue received from donations from individuals or corporate donations. What this means is that SciTech could have $100,000 in expenses, $100,000 in revenue NOT including the revenue of $100,000 in donations and JC will never see a penny of shared revenue. But SciTech will be seating on $100,000 in revenue obtained from donations. Keep in mind a hugh part of income in this type of non-profit could come from donations.The contract wording MUST BE CHANGED to read: JC will have first right to % compensation before ALL OTHER expenses.

Did the council tell you there is a an article in the contract that allows SciTech to apply for ABATEMENTS? Now, why would a NON-PROFIT need to apply for an abatement? Why, because the plan is to lease hugh amounts of space to developers and they will want ABATEMENTS!

Who will be donating the $78 million needed as seed money? Who are these people/corporations and what relationship do they have with JC? Who are their board members and what is their relationship with JC? Have any of them made donations to the Fulop SUPERPAC?

The council is giving 16-17 acres of land to JCRA which will ultimately be sold to SciTech LLC for $10. If you are selling to SciTech for $10 than please explain the arrangement to pay the city a portion of revenue until value of land is repaid. Although, I have already explained JC will probably never receive all payment for the full value of this land.It has been projected that this land could be worth somewhere BETWEEN $100-150 million. Is that why the council, mayor and JCRA wants to wait UNTIL CLOSING to appraise this land value. At which point nothing can be done to secure a compensation for this true value.

ALSO, there should be A PUBLIC MEETING to discuss and answer questions about this transaction. AT this time WE ARE LEAVING THE DECISION OF FIVE (5) people who have a pattern of voting in favor of WHATEVER THE MAYOR WANTS to decide the fate of OUR LAND.

THIS land value could provide an offset to the property tax impact after the REVAL. HOMEOWNER ALL OVER THIS CITY SHOUDL BE OUT QUESTIONING THIS TRANSACTION.DID YOU KNOW that the Council has NO CONTROL over JCRA. Once this land is TRANSFERRED TO JCRA, we the citizens of JC will be POWERLESS in securing our rights to the land or its TRUE VALUE.

There are so many holes in the current contract, which will leave us the residents of JC with NOTHING.

Please call the City Clerks office and add your name to the speakers list 201-547-2233.The 2nd and FINAL READING IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22 @ 6PM. PLEASE COME OUT you OWE IT TO YOURSELF AND YOUR NEIGHBORS.

Yvonne wrote:Councilman Boggiano said the director of Liberty Science Center makes over $400,000 a year in a salary, more than the salary of the president. If they can afford to pay him a salary like that they the center can afford to pay for land. This is the last large open space in JC and reval is around the corner. The city should sell and place in the budget to soften the blow for the reval.

We all know facts dont matter to you, but... if you are referring to the US President, the salary for the position is 400K, plus many other perks (including a travel account, entertainment account, around the clock security, etc) and it should be noted that many, many positions (particularly those like directors of non-profits, museums, universities, etc) are seemingly paid obscene amounts not because they are complex jobs, but because these people have a proven track record of fundraising.

Many years ago, I read a very insightful article into the practice. For those looking from the outside, it seems like crazy money, but a well known, effective fundraiser that can bring in millions and millions of dollars year after year on fundraising, gifts, pledges, etc. is a better investment for an organization looking to hire a CEO or director, than a relatively unknown person unable to generate that kind of investments and gifts. So, what does it matter if the head of a well known museum is paid 5 million dollars, if he can bring in 100 million in fundraising? Would you rather have a net ~90MM operating income generated by that single person? Or, have 10 or 20 MM ??

Councilman Boggiano said the director of Liberty Science Center makes over $400,000 a year in a salary, more than the salary of the president. If they can afford to pay him a salary like that they the center can afford to pay for land. This is the last large open space in JC and reval is around the corner. The city should sell and place in the budget to soften the blow for the reval.

I have so many concerns about this transaction. Many concerns that every property taxpayer and voter in JC should have FULL answers to before this transfer is approved.

Why wouldn't the council have the real estate appraised before the closing? Who ever heard of closing on real estate before having it appraised. As a homeowner didn't you have the property you were purchasing appraised before you purchased it?

Why is the Council President Lavarro voting on this transfer when he is also the Chair of JCRA. There must be a conflict of interest here. It may not be unlawful, but is certainly is unethical. As NJRA chair he has information about this transaction that no one else on the council has, yet he is allowed to vote on this transaction. Lavarro should abstain from voting, that is the ethical thing to do.Also Daniel Rivera who also sits on the JCRA board. This the only ethical thing to do.

Why is the council and mayor promoting this 50/50 and 80/20 revenue share? They forgot to tell the public THERE WILL BE NO REVENUE SHARE. You ask why, this is why. Because the full agreement reads, that revenue will be shared when it exceeds expenses. Also, the revenue share will NOT include any revenue received from donations from individuals or corporate donations. What this means is that SciTech could have $100,000 in expenses, $100,000 in revenue NOT including the revenue of $100,000 in donations and JC will never see a penny of shared revenue. But SciTech will be seating on $100,000 in revenue obtained from donations. Keep in mind a hugh part of income in this type of non-profit could come from donations.The contract wording MUST BE CHANGED to read: JC will have first right to % compensation before ALL OTHER expenses.

Did the council tell you there is a an article in the contract that allows SciTech to apply for ABATEMENTS? Now, why would a NON-PROFIT need to apply for an abatement? Why, because the plan is to lease hugh amounts of space to developers and they will want ABATEMENTS!

Who will be donating the $78 million needed as seed money? Who are these people/corporations and what relationship do they have with JC? Who are their board members and what is their relationship with JC? Have any of them made donations to the Fulop SUPERPAC?

The council is giving 16-17 acres of land to JCRA which will ultimately be sold to SciTech LLC for $10. If you are selling to SciTech for $10 than please explain the arrangement to pay the city a portion of revenue until value of land is repaid. Although, I have already explained JC will probably never receive all payment for the full value of this land.It has been projected that this land could be worth somewhere BETWEEN $100-150 million. Is that why the council, mayor and JCRA wants to wait UNTIL CLOSING to appraise this land value. At which point nothing can be done to secure a compensation for this true value.

ALSO, there should be A PUBLIC MEETING to discuss and answer questions about this transaction. AT this time WE ARE LEAVING THE DECISION OF FIVE (5) people who have a pattern of voting in favor of WHATEVER THE MAYOR WANTS to decide the fate of OUR LAND.

THIS land value could provide an offset to the property tax impact after the REVAL. HOMEOWNER ALL OVER THIS CITY SHOUDL BE OUT QUESTIONING THIS TRANSACTION.

DID YOU KNOW that the Council has NO CONTROL over JCRA. Once this land is TRANSFERRED TO JCRA, we the citizens of JC will be POWERLESS in securing our rights to the land or its TRUE VALUE.

There are so many holes in the current contract, which will leave us the residents of JC with NOTHING.

Please call the City Clerks office and add your name to the speakers list 201-547-2233.The 2nd and FINAL READING IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22 @ 6PM. PLEASE COME OUT you OWE IT TO YOURSELF AND YOUR NEIGHBORS.

It's obvious that this guy works for Mayor Fulop..... In all my years in JC, I've seen it a million times..... His job is to mute any dissension, especially in an election year... He'll never make any sense. That's the problem with anonymous signatures.

It IS definitely a fantasy until breaking ground. please..those plots of land around there has been sitting vacant for decades even during the mega real estate booms in 07 and now.

Even with the golf course next door, port liberte (another disaster), and lsc very close, noone wants to touch those lands because of the location and access to....well nothing.

it's a gift someone is willing to develop it and even build school and public space on it. Just giving it away for free to build high density "cookie cutter" condo/rentals there is much better than what it is now... [/quote]

I gave you a link to a giant development proposal to LSC, you ignore it.

'Access to nothing'? There is a NJ Turnpike exit right there, and a Hudson Bergen Light Rail stop, both within yards. And Fulop has plans to extend Jersey Avenue south to connect directly to LSP.

So, we have developers going nuts in the area (four or five active residential projects in the works), lots of commercial development (Sam AM, the old NuBar space, the new noodle shop going up next to the Lafayette Corner Store, two Grind Shop locations), lots of community support for another Light Rail stop west on Pacific)

It IS definitely a fantasy until breaking ground. please..those plots of land around there has been sitting vacant for decades even during the mega real estate booms in 07 and now.

Even with the golf course next door, port liberte (another disaster), and lsc very close, noone wants to touch those lands because of the location and access to....well nothing.

it's a gift someone is willing to develop it and even build school and public space on it. Just giving it away for free to build high density "cookie cutter" condo/rentals there is much better than what it is now...

While you're looking at Google maps, see the Liberty National Golf Course, which is 9/10 of a mile away and has been there since 2009: " Instead, I'm on the club's private vessel, speeding to a round at the $250 million private golf course–the most expensive ever built. The cost of membership: $500,000 plus annual dues. On shore, Liberty's steel and glass clubhouse reflects the Manhattan skyline. " Jul 24, 2009Inside A $250 Million Golf Course - Forbeshttps://www.forbes.com/.../golf-barcla ... golf-liberty-national.htm

GrovePath wrote:16 Acres is a whole lot of land. It is the size of the entire World Trade Center site. What experience and background do those in charge of Liberty Science Center have in developing such a huge and high value project.

While the size of the site may be comparable to the WTC, it's really important to consider the context of this property. While it borders LSP on one side, to the west is I78, train tracks, semi-abandoned industrial properties in the triangle between the HBLR, Craven Point Avenue, and Garfield Avenue. West of Garfield Avenue is the worst neighborhood in JC. Take a look at GoogleEarthMaps!

I'm not sure the site, or the surrounding location, proximity to LSP notwithstanding, will ever support a huge and high value project - there is simply nothing there to attract anyone beyond the park. A casino? Maybe, as it's self-contained and you can ignore the surrounds outside of the park. I can't imagine there being interest in a hotel, when there are plenty of hotels located in areas that have some quality to recommend them as a place to stay.

Of course, Fulop wants to back this, and he was gung ho behind a casino and 90 story hotel a few hundred yards away, which would be built on the same landfill and in proximity to the same industrial and sketchy neighborhoods . . . [/quote]

all you whiners forget this is swamp land sitting in the ghetto of jersey city.

you are in fantasy land if you think some developer will come buy this land even to build "cookie cutter" condos or rentals. There are so much vacant lots in the ghettos of jersey city outside of downtown and journal square area, the city couldnt give them away if wanted to for development.

this will transform a blight pocket of land into a nice thing while providing benefits such as the school back to the city.

all you people do is whine and whine whenever there is ANY development going on anywhere in jersey city, be it downtown, jsq, or in the ghettos. I am glad none of you are running jersey city, otherwise the entire city will still be an abandoned warehouse/factory dump

GrovePath wrote:16 Acres is a whole lot of land. It is the size of the entire World Trade Center site. What experience and background do those in charge of Liberty Science Center have in developing such a huge and high value project.

While the size of the site may be comparable to the WTC, it's really important to consider the context of this property. While it borders LSP on one side, to the west is I78, train tracks, semi-abandoned industrial properties in the triangle between the HBLR, Craven Point Avenue, and Garfield Avenue. West of Garfield Avenue is the worst neighborhood in JC. Take a look at GoogleEarthMaps!

I'm not sure the site, or the surrounding location, proximity to LSP notwithstanding, will ever support a huge and high value project - there is simply nothing there to attract anyone beyond the park. A casino? Maybe, as it's self-contained and you can ignore the surrounds outside of the park. I can't imagine there being interest in a hotel, when there are plenty of hotels located in areas that have some quality to recommend them as a place to stay.

Of course, Fulop wants to back this, and he was gung ho behind a casino and 90 story hotel a few hundred yards away, which would be built on the same landfill and in proximity to the same industrial and sketchy neighborhoods . . .

GrovePath wrote:16 Acres is a whole lot of land. It is the size of the entire World Trade Center site. What experience and background do those in charge of Liberty Science Center have in developing such a huge and high value project.

While the size of the site may be comparable to the WTC, it's really important to consider the context of this property. While it borders LSP on one side, to the west is I78, train tracks, semi-abandoned industrial properties in the triangle between the HBLR, Craven Point Avenue, and Garfield Avenue. West of Garfield Avenue is the worst neighborhood in JC. Take a look at GoogleEarthMaps!

I'm not sure the site, or the surrounding location, proximity to LSP notwithstanding, will ever support a huge and high value project - there is simply nothing there to attract anyone beyond the park. A casino? Maybe, as it's self-contained and you can ignore the surrounds outside of the park. I can't imagine there being interest in a hotel, when there are plenty of hotels located in areas that have some quality to recommend them as a place to stay.

It's not up to me to make a business plan for this project . . . and the city of JC doesn't seem to want to do it either.

We all know about blockbuster movies, earning hundreds of millions of dollars, that never seem to make a profit-I could imagine the 'gift shop' having some very high paid staff which will suppress the profit availability-nah, that'd never happen in Jersey City!

added-I think Steve already is on record saying the LHS will be relocated, if I find the time I'll post the link.

Monroe wrote:JC hasn't paid for a school in recent years anyway-Abbott and the NJ taxpayers have been paying, so this isn't saving JC a penny-it's not been spending its own money anyway.

Was the state talking about building a science-oriented public school in JC any time soon? Yes? No?

Quote:

No risk?

Correct.

The city is not investing any funds directly into the program, gets more input on the use of the space, and gets a school. Even if the city never earns any additional revenues, it hasn't lost a dime.

Maybe you can make a case that there is an opportunity cost. However, pretty much any other use of the land would involve larger structures, and very likely something residents don't want (like a high-rise building and/or casino). I.e. selling the land to developers means a less desirable project and/or loss of control. So make sure you add that to your calculations.

Quote:

Well, giving away a valuable piece of land with no likely return (we haven't seen a single spreadsheet or study showing how long/if $78 million would be paid back, let alone whatever 'valuation' is placed on this land)

I find it odd that you view the land as incredibly valuable, but not valuable enough that commercial and rental properties on the land can possibly ever turn a profit. Hmmmmmm.

JC hasn't paid for a school in recent years anyway-Abbott and the NJ taxpayers have been paying, so this isn't saving JC a penny-it's not been spending its own money anyway.

No risk? Well, giving away a valuable piece of land with no likely return (we haven't seen a single spreadsheet or study showing how long/if $78 million would be paid back, let alone whatever 'valuation' is placed on this land)

Let's face it, if this was a student study offered at a C grade business school it would be handed back as 'incomplete' or an F. The idea that this is the foundation for a project likely to cost a third of a billion dollars is laughable, if it wasn't so pathetic and insulting.

As I said earlier, I'd give Steve props if he just came out and told the truth about it-JC is giving away the valuable land and likely won't ever see a dime from it. Because we know this is what will happen.

Monroe wrote:So LSC is 'raising' 78 million that will have to be repaid-that's a loan, right?

Apparently not.

The LSC wants to raise $78 million in donations for the project. The deal also makes $78 million the point at which the city starts getting its cut.

Quote:

Where is that money coming from?

Rents on commercial and residential space, as well as events in the conference center.

Quote:

So we don't know the value of the land, we don't know the revenue stream the LSC will tap to pay for the land, we don't know how long that will take (if ever)-sounds like Nancy Pelosi talking about Obamacare-you have to pass it to know what's in it!

sigh

I've already said (and understandably you might have missed) that I support getting an assessment sooner rather than later. That said, it's not much of a stretch to ballpark the value of the land -- as well as the value of the public school that will be built there.

Thus, from what I can tell, the deal is:- City donates valuable land- City gets back a public school, and cash after $78m is brought in- A relatively low-height project, that isn't a casino or hotel right next to LSP, and provides something unique to the NYC area- All of this at no financial risk to the city

16 Acres is a whole lot of land. It is the size of the entire World Trade Center site. What experience and background do those in charge of Liberty Science Center have in developing such a huge and high value project.

If not giving the land away means its a deal breaker for SciCity, I say just give the land away. Its vacant, unattractive, unused land. Its not like we're getting any money from this land and anyone else is losing out from this deal anyway.

At least if they build this, it will benefit the city by having it published internationally and it will benefit thousands of people for generations to come. Sometimes you need to allow for some sacrifices for long term benefits.

The plan, which will clear a major hurdle at next week's City Council meeting before moving on to the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency, would allow SciTech Scity, a new arm of Liberty Science Center, to purchase the now-vacant land for $10 in what the city is calling a long-term partnership that will benefit the city "forever."

The 16 acres, formerly home to a city car impound lot, is located on Phillip Street adjacent to LSC.